(Note: persons such as "Meno", are requested not to answer, as they don't measure up to the lowest level of the requirements of intelligent discussion. E.g., respect for definitions as means to the researches collective de la veritas as means to reach the subject matter itself.)

All are post-Kantian, as that names a mode of existence, which is total; which extends to the past. Ergo, it is wrongly said that anyone, e.g., the academic "Alain Badiou", is "pre-Kantian." This might be said only in the sense of correctness, in the Heideggerean sense. That the ego is correctly identified with a correctly drawn up pre-Kantianess, and correspondingly the correct look of the statements produced by such a person. However, the basic motivation is not the same, sinc eit is preio to the ego's self interpretation.

Pre-Kantian can only speak in the terms of History of Being. And then, only according to the faith (or radical presupposition) in the reaching of the reach of the powerful region of the questioning of the unity of anschauen and Vernunft in their mysterious togetherness as what is most questionable in the thinking of Being as event of the Element.

--

What is pre-Kantian: E.g., how does one understand the question of Kant regarding the meaning of the Critical (in contradistinction to the Dogmatic and, what, according to Kant, is the same: the Skeptical: ergo, 'who ever says there is no surety is sure')?

In a nutshell, pre-kantian means back in the day when mystics and bogus logic passed for philosophy and were given undue credence. Like imagine if, in 2018, an astronomer and an astrologer were seen as equal in their ability to make predictions...that'd be fucked up.

You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

"In a nutshell, pre-kantian means back in the day when mystics and bogus logic passed for philosophy and were given undue credence. Like imagine if, in 2018, an astronomer and an astrologer were seen as equal in their ability to make predictions...that'd be fucked up."

Interesting, so, some of the group hold that pre-Kantian means the same as pre-Scientific?

Some other members of the group consider pre-Kantian to mean prior to the time when a theory to explain the basis of knowledge was necessary. In the sense that, if the human being has a way of encountering reality, which is not the only way, that way might be faulty. E.g., the upsetting of the formula, the thing is adequate to the senses (adaequatio intellectus et rei). I.e., prior to the theory of "accesses" or the necessary elements of any experience.

Loosely, yes. Aside from the millions of hairs that have been split over discussions of these kinds of things the general idea is that Kant laid the philosophical groundwork of the modern scientific world view. Think about that scene from Monty Python where the mob is trying to determine whether the woman is in fact a witch. They made some good deductions, and the reasoned from one point to another, but they didn't have the right understanding of what they were looking at, or the right information about what ducks are made of, or a good method to be able to systematize all such a way as to yield them the truth of the matter. They should have read more analytic philosophy.

You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

"the right understanding of what they were looking at, or the right information about what ducks are made of"

The group is highly incredulous. It says: Is "Analytic Philosophy" a kind of magic? More likely, this analytic philosophy, so thinks the group, drawing on mean and common folk sense, as it were, is a kind of unthinking signal, rather like the flashing of "gang signs". Such that, whenever Analytic Philosophy, its power never dies, is mentioned, the heavens part and the light shows on human beings, the cool breeze becomes fragrant, and all hearts rejoice.

The group finds absurd the claim that people didn't know what ducks are made of, being as all they need do is eat one, which they often did, or that the god, Analytic Philosophy, could tell them, if they didn't already know. The group asks: How does such magic work?

The group thinks: Asking what is necessary in any experience (rather than accidental content), and answering, time and space, is part of the Kantian question. E.g., Kant claims if someone falls asleep in a carriage that carries them from Koenigsberg, to the other side of Koenigsberg, they can be sure they traveled through space even though they did not see it happen.

It's not magic. It's the opposite of magic. There's been so much said by so many people over so many years and the whole thing is famously misunderstood. The general idea is that before Kant, mystics and others along those lines were given undue credence for conclusions that they reached based on a failed attempt at understanding the world. That attempt being one that was characterized by fundamental misunderstandings about epistemology, logic, and the necessity of systematization in one's understanding of the world.

You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

“It's not magic. It's the opposite of magic. There's been so much said by so many people over so many years and the whole thing is famously misunderstood. The general idea is that before Kant, mystics and others along those lines were given undue credence for conclusions that they reached based on a failed attempt at understanding the world. That attempt being one that was characterized by fundamental misunderstandings about epistemology, logic, and the necessity of systematization in one's understanding of the world.”

The group considers this answer vacant generalization, supporting the worship of the symbol “Analytic Philosophy”. The group doesn't think the group has even an inkling of what it is talking about. Rather, the group feels the magical spontaneous power of the authority vested in it from its early youth by divine revelation, i.e., through being told by older persons and text books. The group says, sheer magical kneeling faith is in this sad beautiful group answer.